Covid-19 Economic Impact

[Pete]

We will soon have to shift from "the sky is falling and everything must stop!" to "most people are getting mildly ill and just need bed rest and then we'll deal with the most critical cases as they arise".

Once the panic about overwhelming hospitals passes (and I think it soon will) then we can once again move forward and deal with the residual economic fallout.

[jn1780]

This situation is completely unprecedented.

Fortunately, we live in the information age where we can monitor other countries and how the virus is progressing.

In the end, it's likely we'll come to the conclusion we just have to keep going and as long as we prioritize the most critical cases, there is every chance our hospitals won't become overwhelmed, which has always been the main concern.

We will have to think outside the box, there are still going to be a lot of people unemployed. They may not be healthcare professionals, but they dont need to know the entire medical encyclopedia. They will have to be taught covid treatment protocols.

[Pete]

Looking at the site below, of the current 7,800 cases or so in the U.S., only 12 are considered serious/critical.

I realize we are early on and that as the illness spreads and time passes, more people will move into the serious category.

But we also know the virus has been circulating in this country for weeks if not longer and we've yet to see anywhere near a huge number of severe cases.

I'll think we'll collectively get our minds around this, the economic consequences will become the biggest concern, and there will be great public support for going back to school and work.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[catch22]

As long as we don't see some incredible spike in critical cases (and that has not been happening anywhere) I could see a scenario where we just take a "we have to get on with things" approach after a couple of months.

There is really no way our economy can survive a complete shut down for 6 months or more and that reality is starting to hit home.

So, hopefully we'll be able to make a responsible judgment in 30 to 60 days that yes, there are going to be cases, but our healthcare system can handle the most extreme cases so everyone needs to get back to work.

Hopefully.

I think the most important thing is slowing this down so our healthcare system can catch up a little bit. It is clear that the US has been woefully unprepared. letting this into the wild while our crisis response is in hibernation would be extremely risky since there is no herd immunity. Now that the supply chains for the healthcare industry are in overdrive, perhaps the risks can be better managed and slowly we can get society back up and running again soon.

It's very similar to wildfire strategy, it's not about putting the fire out, it's about slowing it down and containing it into area that can be managed or at least areas that are the least risky.

[Pete]

I think the most important thing is slowing this down so our healthcare system can catch up a little bit. It is clear that the US has been woefully unprepared. letting this into the wild while our crisis response is in hibernation would be extremely risky since there is no herd immunity. Now that the supply chains for the healthcare industry are in overdrive, perhaps the risks can be better managed and slowly we can get society back up and running again soon.

It's very similar to wildfire strategy, it's not about putting the fire out, it's about slowing it down and containing it into area that can be managed or at least are the least risky.

And really, that can be done by setting up drive-through testing stations and then focusing our healthcare resources on dealing with only critical cases.

Once we get there, we'll have a proven system and we can start to resume normalcy.

[Pete]

According to this site, the U.S. has over 6,000 hospitals:

https://www.aha.org/statistics/fast-facts-us-hospitals

Each of those have a lot of beds and staff.


That's a ton of capacity if we just focus those resources on the people who are in serious condition. Everyone else can just stay home.

[jn1780]

I think the government is hoping and praying for a summer slowdown and they can use that time to plan for a winter wave.

Shutting the country down for 18 months is not a realist strategy. Sorry it's just not. There wont be a functioning government to bail anyone out.

[OKC Guy]

Looking at the site below, of the current 7,800 cases or so in the U.S., only 12 are considered serious/critical.

I realize we are early on and that as the illness spreads and time passes, more people will move into the serious category.

But we also know the virus has been circulating in this country for weeks if not longer and we've yet to see anywhere near a huge number of severe cases.

I'll think we'll collectively get our minds around this, the economic consequences will become the biggest concern, and there will be great public support for going back to school and work.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Agree. After fear comes anger and the economic impact is way worse than China virus.

I hate to keep mentioning the flu but we lose 20,000-30,000 per year to flu and for the China virus to justify killing our economy would need to be 10 to 50 times worse. Also, a lot of the deaths were to people who may have succumbed to seasonal flu or other ailments. Not to downplay anyone who caught it but putting it in perspective.

[gopokes88]

As long as we don't seem some incredible spike in critical cases (and that has not been happening anywhere) I could see a scenario where we just take a "we have to get on with things" approach after a couple of months.

There is really no way our economy can survive a complete shut down for 6 months or more and that reality is starting to hit home.

So, hopefully we'll be able to make a responsible judgment in 30 to 60 days that yes, there are going to be cases, but our healthcare system can handle the most extreme cases so everyone needs to get back to work.

Hopefully.

99% have been people with prior or other health issues. In America that means fat. Should have taken better care of yourselves or do you want to ruin the generation's life for a decade beneath you. Given this is Boomers were dealing with the answer is yes.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...ys/ar-BB11mr4X

This is the 2nd time in 12 years the boomers have done this.

[Pete]

1. Cease all hospital functions apart from dealing with people who are in serious condition (no elective surgeries, etc.)

2. Bring in healthcare workers to any hotspots, or transport cases to where there is capacity.

3. Provide drive-through testing stations so any concerned parties don't burden the hospital system.

4. Unless there is some huge spike in serious cases, get on with life.

[jn1780]

Looking at the site below, of the current 7,800 cases or so in the U.S., only 12 are considered serious/critical.

I realize we are early on and that as the illness spreads and time passes, more people will move into the serious category.

But we also know the virus has been circulating in this country for weeks if not longer and we've yet to see anywhere near a huge number of severe cases.

I'll think we'll collectively get our minds around this, the economic consequences will become the biggest concern, and there will be great public support for going back to school and work.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

That 7800 is being under reported, A lot of people had it, but never realized they did.

[gopokes88]

According to this site, the U.S. has over 6,000 hospitals:

https://www.aha.org/statistics/fast-facts-us-hospitals

Each of those have a lot of beds and staff.


That's a ton of capacity if we just focus those resources on the people who are in serious condition. Everyone else can just stay home.

Most of America isn't as dense as the outbreaks as well.

OKC already somewhat social distances through lifestyle

[Pete]

That 7800 is being under reported, A lot of people had it, but never realized they did.

Right, but the serious cases are not underreported and that is what needs to be closely monitored.

If that number doesn't shoot up rapidly, that is the most important thing.

[catch22]

According to this site, the U.S. has over 6,000 hospitals:

https://www.aha.org/statistics/fast-facts-us-hospitals

Each of those have a lot of beds and staff.


That's a ton of capacity if we just focus those resources on the people who are in serious condition. Everyone else can just stay home.

Hopefully, when the dust settles we can learn from this to better improve our healthcare system, crisis response, and have a better playbook on what to do if this were to arise again.

[TheTravellers]

This is the tip of the economic iceberg. We're in inning 1. You've only lost some retirement funds. Go ahead and kiss that goodbye. You'll never retire.

-Ready for nationwide housing prices to fall 20-30% because everyone is out of a job?
-Ready for credit shortages? The student loan and personal unsecured loan defaults will be through the roof. That's 1.3 trillion. That'll go systemic. It's 3-6 months out, and what if the next point is true. You know like waiters and servers carry huge amounts of it. They're unemployed today thanks to government leadership.
-The Fed/US Treasury keeps firing $1 trillion bullets every month, and runs out of capacity
-Then comes massive asset deflation mixed with rampant inflation

Millions may have died, but in this scenario hundreds and hundreds of millions are going to suffer severely.

Then trump will probably suspend the election and we start teetering on a total breakdown of society.

Yep, all sounds possible (not sure how likely, but yeah, possible) to me. I agree with the "shelter elderly and at risk" viewpoints, and am reminded of Spock:

"Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

Read one story about a community college student who now has to do remote schooling. Has no computer, is poor, works a few jobs, has student loans/rent, and just really can't do remote schooling, and has also now lost his jobs and can't pay rent. So now his entire future is possibly gone because he won't graduate from college, will have his debt, may end up homeless. And who knows how many more thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands are just like him.

And yes, I know this all gets into dangerous and moral/ethical scary territory, but I've been saying this ever since it started - is it worth it to destroy the country's economy and harm possibly hundreds of millions of people for years, if not decades?

Oh, and I say this having a mother that's in her 80s with COPD and an uncle that's in his 90s (but in good health).

[Pete]

Hopefully, when the dust settles we can learn from this to better improve our healthcare system, crisis response, and have a better playbook on what to do if this were to arise again.

Right, especially since we are a global economy and people move very freely around the globe.

Best case scenario: We learn something from this that saves up from something much more severe.

[Pete]

And yes, I know this all gets into dangerous and moral/ethical scary territory, but I've been saying this ever since it started - is it worth it to destroy the country's economy and harm possibly hundreds of millions of people for years, if not decades?

I think that realization is just now starting to hit home and public sentiment will begin to shift and policies will shift accordingly.

Otherwise, we run the real risk of our entire democracy imploding and then forget about healthcare or anything else.

[catch22]

Would it be a bad idea to have some larger hospitals placed in the outskirts of larger cities, even if they are largely unused? Would the cost of building and maintaining buildings that can be opened within days of an emerging crisis to provide surge capacity for situations such as these be worth it? Sure the hospital staff may not be there to meet demand, but that would maybe require some out of the box thinking on the part of the army or national guard. Have people who are ready, able, and capable of providing surge patient support in a crisis. Essentially on-demand nurses following instructions from a doctor for only for that particular illness. They wouldn't have to necessarily be a registered nurse, but people who have been determined by the military to have the right set of skills to follow commands in a medical setting in times of crisis. I'm not sure what the answer is, I am just throwing out some ideas.

To me that is no different than spending billions on airplanes and tanks that sit around all day waiting for Russia or NK to attack. I am not discounting that, but in the age of travel, our biggest threat may not be from warfare but a virus. Our nation should invest more in assets that can help us in those circumstances

[Pete]

This reminds of how England dealt with terrorist attacks.

There were bombings in London and the prime minister the very next morning, climbed on The Tube himself and told people to get on with life.

That's probably what we're going to have to do here.

[mugofbeer]

99% have been people with prior or other health issues. In America that means fat. Should have taken better care of yourselves or do you want to ruin the generation's life for a decade beneath you. Given this is Boomers were dealing with the answer is yes.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...ys/ar-BB11mr4X

This is the 2nd time in 12 years the boomers have done this.

Sounds like you have some real Mother/Daddy issues. I'd retort because you are so wrong, but you are so full of hate you would deny even the most obvious. I feel badly for you and whatever happened to you in your childhood.

[TheTravellers]

Would it be a bad idea to have some larger hospitals placed in the outskirts of larger cities, even if they are largely unused? Would the cost of building and maintaining buildings that can be opened within days of an emerging crisis to provide surge capacity for situations such as these be worth it? Sure the hospital staff may not be there to meet demand, but that would maybe require some out of the box thinking on the part of the army or national guard. Have people who are ready, able, and capable of providing surge patient support in a crisis. Essentially on-demand nurses following instructions from a doctor for only for that particular illness. They wouldn't have to necessarily be a registered nurse, but people who have been determined by the military to have the right set of skills to follow commands in a medical setting in times of crisis. I'm not sure what the answer is, I am just throwing out some ideas.

Our value-profit-over-everything capitalist system would never build hospitals for them to sit empty and accumulate maintenance costs on a daily basis (they couldn't just sit there empty with no power, water, etc. just collecting dust, they'd have to be kept in a "ready" state, I'd think, along with resupplying every so often because drugs expire, etc.)

[Pete]

I really think we have plenty of hospital capacity, it's just there may be some need for overflow help and beds in certain spots for a period of time.

We should probably have a plan to do that. There are tons of empty or vastly under-utilized structures virtually everywhere (vacant retail spaces, churches, schools, etc.)

[Pete]

The stats at this site also shows we have almost a million hospital beds in the U.S.:

https://www.aha.org/statistics/fast-facts-us-hospitals

[OKC Guy]

I think that realization is just now starting to hit home and public sentiment will begin to shift and policies will shift accordingly.

Otherwise, we run the real risk of our entire democracy imploding and then forget about healthcare or anything else.

Costco agrees with you:


Brianna Sacks
@bri_sacks
Costco has resisted closing down its large corporate campus near Seattle in King County and directing its employees to work from home, despite concerns from staff

On Tues., the company said in an email a worker died from COVID-19. The office is still open

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtml...mpression=true

[Mr. Blue Sky]

99% have been people with prior or other health issues. In America that means fat. Should have taken better care of yourselves or do you want to ruin the generation's life for a decade beneath you. Given this is Boomers were dealing with the answer is yes.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...ys/ar-BB11mr4X

This is the 2nd time in 12 years the boomers have done this.

I know you are getting wiped out in the stock market, but hang on, take a deep breath. What you just typed is almost ban-worthy. You just lashed out at an entire generation with racist, sexist like vitriol. This is NOT a “Boomers did this to us” thing at all. Could you explain why you think “Boomers” are to blame? Do you not think plenty of gen-x and millennials are not in the machinery involved in your perceived generational attack on you?